Programmer tries to explain binary search to the police - eviltoast
  • null@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    No, that wasn’t the intention of your original reply. Makes no sense in the context of your original response. Just goalposts you’ve moved after the fact.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, that wasn’t the intention of your original reply. Makes no sense in the context of your original response. Just goalposts you’ve moved after the fact.

      You’re being intellectually dishonest. I explaned truthfully what my implied thoughts were, in detail, which justified the point I was making.

      You can’t change them just because you want to win an Internet point.

      • null@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No I’m not. Your explanations do not align with what you quoted and stated in your initial replies. They’re poor attempts at retroactively making it seem like you were implying something you obviously weren’t.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          No I’m not. Your explanations do not align with what you quoted and stated in your initial replies. They’re poor attempts at retroactively making it seem like you were implying something you obviously weren’t.

          I disagree. I stand by what I’ve said.